HENRY In the great cities of Vietnam, a polished version of young success now circulates almost as a public script. The salary is strong, th...

HENRY

In the great cities of Vietnam, a polished version of young success now circulates almost as a public script. The salary is strong, the office immaculate, the devices expensive, and the working day long enough to make ambition look tangible. From a distance, such a life appears enviable, even secure. Up close, the shine begins to thin. Rent claims its portion with mechanical regularity, family obligations wait without complaint, and the old markers of arrival, above all a home and even a modest car, remain stubbornly out of reach. CNBC uses the label HENRY for high earners who are not rich yet, people whose income looks impressive while financial security keeps receding under the pressure of rising costs, debt, and lifestyle inflation.

What makes this condition so corrosive is not poverty in the traditional sense, but contradiction refined into routine. Money comes in, yet solidity does not gather around it. Prestige clings to the pay cheque, only to evaporate once housing, transport, professional upkeep, and obligations to parents or siblings begin their quiet procession. In cities where property seems priced for another class of life entirely, the ladder remains visible while its rungs withdraw on contact. Not for lack of discipline do many young professionals continue renting in the very districts their labour helps animate. They are affluent enough to be mistaken for the winners of the urban game, yet not secure enough to step off the treadmill and call the race meaningful.

For those without inherited advantage, the strain turns harsher still. A fortunate minority begin with family property, family capital, or at least the luxury of error without immediate ruin. [I] Others must construct stability from bare ground while keeping pace with an economy that invoices tomorrow before today has been fully paid for. That difference alters more than what people can buy. It alters endurance, risk, even the moral weather of ambition. [II] When intense effort still fails to secure the basics, staying no longer feels simply difficult. It begins to feel irrational. At that point, departure acquires a new dignity. Leaving is no longer read merely as aspiration. It starts to resemble self-preservation.

That is why HENRY is less a flattering label than a warning sign. It marks the zone in which earnings rise, status becomes visible, yet settlement remains indefinitely deferred. [III] When a society allows some of its brightest young workers to conclude that belonging, ownership, and rest are structurally cheaper elsewhere, brain drain ceases to be a technical policy phrase and becomes a verdict. A country risks more than frustration when effort can purchase appearance but not rootedness. [IV] It risks educating ambition, polishing talent, and then watching both take flight.

[Adapted from https://stg-aws02pub.cnbc.com/2025/07/26/henrys-why-high-earning-americans-do-not-feel-rich.html]

Question 31: Where in the passage does the following sentence best fit?

The private wound does not stay private for long.

A. [I]        B. [II]        C. [III]        D. [IV]

Question 32: The word "it" in paragraph 2 refers to __________.

A. routine        B. condition        C. money        D. solidity

Question 33: According to paragraph 1, which of the following is NOT mentioned as a factor that hinders the financial security of HENRYs?

A. The increasing expense of daily life.        B. Debts that individuals have accumulated.

C. The tendency to increase personal spending.        D. The lack of high-paying career opportunities.

Question 34: Which of the following best summarises paragraph 2?

A. A high income still allows many urban professionals to live comfortably, even if property ownership now requires greater patience and stricter spending.

B. The real damage lies in earning enough to look successful while remaining unable to build lasting security in cities where the path upward keeps retreating.

C. Many young renters stay in expensive districts mainly because prestige and convenience matter more to them than slower but safer financial progress.

D. Traditional poverty has become less important in large cities because visible status now depends more on presentation than on long-term ownership.

Question 35: The word “immaculate” in paragraph 1 is closest in meaning to __________.

A. perfect        B. formal        C. modern        D. quiet

Question 36: Which of the following is true according to the passage?

A. A strong salary may create the appearance of success even when stability and ownership remain difficult to secure.

B. Most young professionals continue renting because they prefer mobility to the burdens that usually come with owning property.

C. Family obligations matter mainly for lower earners, while high-income workers are affected more by debt and lifestyle spending.

D. The HENRY condition is treated as a useful stage that helps ambitious workers become more disciplined before they settle down.

Question 37: According to paragraph 3, which of the following most clearly explains why “departure acquires a new dignity”?

A. Leaving becomes more attractive once young workers realise that family wealth has made competition in major cities completely unfair.

B. Migration begins to look respectable when ambitious people see that another society is more willing to reward talent with status.

C. Staying starts to lose its moral appeal after economic pressure makes comfort, patience, and personal ambition harder to balance.

D. Leaving comes to seem less like chasing status and more like protecting oneself when hard work still cannot secure a basic foothold.

Question 38: Which of the following best paraphrases the sentence “the ladder remains visible while its rungs withdraw on contact” in paragraph 2?

A. The route to advancement still appears difficult, but determined people can gradually move upward if they remain patient and disciplined.

B. The promise of upward mobility can still be seen, yet each apparent step towards it slips away when people try to use it.

C. Urban professionals continue to believe in social mobility because the signs of success stay visible even after the rewards have changed.

D. Property ownership remains desirable, though fewer people now regard it as the only meaningful sign that they have moved ahead.

Question 39: Which of the following can most likely be inferred from the passage?

A. Without inherited advantage, most high earners will eventually abandon city life because ownership has already become impossible for their generation.

B. If wages continue rising in major cities, the HENRY condition will gradually weaken as more professionals become able to absorb everyday costs.

C. When visible success is available but rooted security is not, a country becomes more likely to lose talented young workers to places that offer both.

D. Brain drain is driven mainly by housing costs, since other pressures mentioned in the passage would matter far less if property were cheaper.

Question 40: Which of the following best summarises the passage?

A. HENRY describes a class of urban high earners whose visible success masks fragile security, unequal starting points, and the growing temptation to leave when effort buys image but not rootedness.

B. Urban professionals may earn enough to look successful, yet high living costs and family obligations keep traditional goals distant and make long-term stability harder to secure.

C. Inherited advantage now shapes urban ambition so strongly that even disciplined high earners can struggle to compete with peers who begin with family property or financial support.

D. Brain drain grows more serious when ambitious young workers begin to see migration not simply as advancement, but as a more realistic path to security, belonging, and rest.